fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2381 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2381 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Horrible Histories]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Galileo, Strawberry Night]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Star Trek]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Sphere]

__________________________________________________

06.

[Malcom Tucker (played by Peter Capaldi) in The Thick of It]

__________________________________________________

07.

[Coupling]

__________________________________________________

08.

[ROM Spaceknight]

__________________________________________________

09.

[Avengers]

__________________________________________________

10.

[My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic]

__________________________________________________

11.

[Lizzie Bennet Diaries]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 023 secrets from Secret Submission Post #340.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

SA

And for the life of me I can't see why you think the "standard 2 point binary" I mentioned is funny. Isn't that the layman's idea of gender and sex? Male and female and nothing in between? The word standard in there was important.

I ask because I'm curious and you have opinions on the matter.

It's funny because it's just as socially constructed as everything else and therefore there's nothing 'standard' about it. The limits of each box vary from time to time and place to place (see, who is and is not regarded as a Real Man or Real Woman), as do the positions of other such boxes (see above about white people identifying as "two-spirit".)

I feel like you're trying to force an argument between two different completely false extremes; option a), ignore all (or most) gender minorities, or option b), faithfully learn and respect every gender minority identifier used on planet earth and regard each of them as a separate static state of being. Whereas out in the real world, identity is subject to constant fluidity and the best you can ever do is try to understand what people mean at the time at which they say it. There's a great Dworkin line about moving on 'from the conservative biology of gender difference to the radical biology of gender similarity', or something like that. Words used to draw lines (including 'male' and 'female') are way less important than occupying the same consensual space, respecting each other, and taking change well when it comes.

I didn't say it wasn't a social construct, so I'm afraid I've lost the flow of the conversation here. All I have to offer is that as-is, in present day, within the frame of "the entire world," the vast majority of human beings will see the male-female binary as standard. I don't think I'm wrong about that.

And please do not strawman me, which you are doing! Nowhere did I say that every gender identity has have its own special category and that everyone must know every term. The question I raised was where agender people fit into this three-part organization system of OP's. If OP must categorize, which they actively did on their own, then their system can have its flaws, one of which I was pointing out! And nobody so far has given me an answer to that question; I would consider "agender people do not exist for realsies" as a rationale for that system, but have not even been given that.

There is NO such thing as agender. You have a damn sex. If you were to have a blood test done, it would either say FEMALE or MALE. You can pretend you're a magical unicorn species that has a ken doll's lower half for genitals all you want, but at the end of the day your DNA proves otherwise.

Please hold the vitriol! There's no need to be angry about this.

"There is NO such thing as agender. You have a damn sex."

Are you saying gender and sex are the same thing, then? Just to be clear.

What do you think about people with Androgen insensitivity syndrome? They're born with a female body and grow up believing themselves to be perfectly regular women. Then one day, alarmed by the fact they've never had a period despite being in their late teens, they go to a doctor, have tests done and find out that their DNA is that of a male. Would you go up to them and say "you may want to be a woman, but you're REALLY a MAN, your DNA proves it!"?

The question I raised was where agender people fit into this three-part organization system of OP's.

No one can answer that question except OP, can they? I sure can't. At this point I suspect you're taking OP too seriously.

I wasn't strawmanning you - I didn't think you were arguing for endless categorisation, only that you were asking me to choose between those two extremes for some abstract reason. OP's proposal never made sense in the first place because it was about cissexuality, not gender.

http://fandomsecrets.dreamwidth.org/837895.html?thread=669255943#cmt669255943

They did, right above you! This explains quite a bit and I think I understand their system now.

Only two sexes exist, male and female.

People are whatever they are physically, according to their DNA.

Intersex people are both sexes, as shown in their DNA and not in their outward appearance.

Anybody who is trans is physically one thing but "is making an effort" or "wants" to be the other, if I am guessing correctly, as their DNA will not change and they will be physically female or male forever regardless of how they physically appear, as it is DNA that matters.

Ironically this doesn't sound all too different from what most people already go by, even though OP made it sound like it was progressive by adding trans and intersex in there. I find myself a little disappointed it wasn't more interesting.

Two base* sexes. I forgot a word!

wtffffffffffff. So can you be agender if you have Turner syndrome, maybe?

I suppose? They state in a thread further down that everyone is either male or female and that is a fact, so...

It's basic sex-binarism-by-DNA pretending to be inclusive by shoehorning intersex (genetic anomalies who cannot be male or female and must necessarily be both) and trans people (who swap between the two binary points only) into peripheral roles around the basic male/female system and denying the legitimacy of genderqueer and agender identities, which they have a obvious disdain for. Yay! Puzzle solved.

Trans people have a mental disorder, that doesn't change their gender though

OK, no. The person you link to screaming about DNA is not me, the person you first replied to.

But if you want it plain, fine. I do believe that there's male, there's female, there's transmale and transfemale and somewhere exists intersex in a place that maybe I don't fully understand. Everything else is bullshit snowflaky "make me feel all special for not being exactly like everybody else." It's the demisexuality of gender and sex.

Clear enough?

Ohgod, Demisexuality. I kind of forgot that bullcrap existed, lol

[ SECRET POST #2381 ]

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums

(frozen comment) Re: Gender/Sexuality spectrums